PDA

View Full Version : FINA says Dubai Charter doesn't apply to Masters



JimRude
June 12th, 2009, 11:22 AM
WTF?

http://www.swimmingworldmagazine.com/lane9/news/21392.asp?q=FINA%20Confirms%20Dubai%20Charter%20No t%20Applicable%20to%20Masters%20Swimming

I guess this means that "anything goes" in masters, unless your national federation places its own limitations on approved suits.

The Fortress
June 12th, 2009, 11:34 AM
Except possibly for WRs: "There are still issues regarding FINA Masters world record ratification as it pertains to types of suits worn."

What will they do with the WRs already set this year in non-FINA approved suits?

thewookiee
June 12th, 2009, 11:46 AM
Well, eventually the Dubai charter will affect masters. I seriously doubt the suit makers(maybe B70 is the exception) will keep making the current style suits that are on the retest/rejected list exclusively for masters. Once the jan 1., 2010 rules apply, they won't make special suits just for us.

So, as our current suits get worn out, ripped up, etc, we will eventually have to purchase suits that fall into accordance with the Dubai Charter.

Chris Stevenson
June 12th, 2009, 12:15 PM
I am curious about the relative sizes of the USAS and USMS markets. Everyone is assuming that the masters market is tiny in comparison...but I tell you, when I go to just run-of-the-mill meets, tech suits are MUCH more in evidence at masters meets than at age-group meets.

Obviously there are far more age-groupers than masters, but I wonder if the masters market is really as small as people are assuming. Old, fat people with disposable incomes, desperate to recapture glory days...sounds like a winner! :)

meldyck
June 12th, 2009, 12:21 PM
Old, fat people with disposable incomes, desperate to recapture glory days...sounds like a winner!

I resemble that remark! My disposable income has taken a serious hit...

thewookiee
June 12th, 2009, 12:22 PM
If you take into account masters swimming all over the WORLD, then maybe they will keep making tech suits for masters.

But do if you were running a swimsuit company(say TYR) would you want to keep developing a "tech suit" line for the masters group? Or focus that energy into developing the fastest swimwear possible, under the given rules, for all segments?

meldyck
June 12th, 2009, 12:26 PM
But, seriously, folks how can a FINA commissioner say the Charter on suits doesn't apply to master's but the organization then be hesitant about accepting master's records? This organization has put all four feet into its mouth. Yes, an ass does have four feet...

scyfreestyler
June 12th, 2009, 12:26 PM
Whether the charter applies to USMS or not, I would prefer that our organization observed the same rules for suits as USA Swimming.

jim thornton
June 12th, 2009, 12:34 PM
When an asterisk has its own asterisk, can anybody still see it?

--Zen Master Jim

CreamPuff
June 12th, 2009, 12:35 PM
I am curious about the relative sizes of the USAS and USMS markets. Everyone is assuming that the masters market is tiny in comparison...but I tell you, when I go to just run-of-the-mill meets, tech suits are MUCH more in evidence at masters meets than at age-group meets.

Obviously there are far more age-groupers than masters, but I wonder if the masters market is really as small as people are assuming. Old, fat people with disposable incomes, desperate to recapture glory days...sounds like a winner! :)

I too would love to look at the revenue stream for tech suits. Would it be possible to estimate numbers based on the number of masters swimmers and the % who compete. And then you could guesstimate what percentage of the competitors use tech suits regularly. Do the same thing for USA-S. . . Chris, I love your last statement. I so agree and I am so one of those people!

thewookiee
June 12th, 2009, 12:44 PM
If the charter doesn't apply to masters, then maybe USMS will take the stance that all suits that were approved prior to Jan. 1, 2009 will be allowed in USMS events and any new suits that are developed must comply with FINA's new suit regulations.


This way, current suit will still be able to be used until they are worn out and any new suit developed will be in accordance with the new guidelines. This will take sometime, but eventually USMS would fall back inline with FINA.

Plus, it allows people the chance to use their current suits, and not have that much confusion on approved/not approved suits.

ourswimmer
June 12th, 2009, 12:46 PM
But, seriously, folks how can a FINA commissioner say the Charter on suits doesn't apply to master's but the organization then be hesitant about accepting master's records?

Well, he's a "Press Commission" guy, who may or may not also be a rule-making guy. Certainly I have observed other types of "press secretaries" getting it wrong, or maybe getting it right at the time but then their decision-making bosses go and change the decision on them.

I seriously wonder whether FINA has any lawyers at all. Nothing in any of the (apparently) duly-adopted rules I have seen suggests that the rules on swimwear would apply differently to Masters than to non-Masters.

Midas
June 12th, 2009, 12:50 PM
Once the 2010 rules are finalized, I can't imagine many masters swimmers will still want new suits that don't comply with those rules. I think most of us take ourselves seriously enough not to want a distinction between what we are allowed to wear and what the other competitive organizations are allowed to wear. I'm glad I get to keep using my current suit for the rest of the year, and look forward to getting a FINA compliant suit this winter.

knelson
June 12th, 2009, 01:06 PM
Obviously there are far more age-groupers than masters, but I wonder if the masters market is really as small as people are assuming.

I think masters is a big enough market. One of the other sports I enjoy is snow skiing and there are lots of small, boutique ski manufacturers around these days that probably only sell a few hundred pairs of skis per year. They survive just by selling these so I don't see why a swimsuit manufacturer couldn't continue with a "masters only" suit espeically considering they'd still be selling their other suits to the non-masters market.

In any event, I think this is a real boneheaded move. The rules regarding suits should be the same for everyone.

The Fortress
June 12th, 2009, 01:09 PM
I seriously wonder whether FINA has any lawyers at all. Nothing in any of the (apparently) duly-adopted rules I have seen suggests that the rules on swimwear would apply differently to Masters than to non-Masters.

True. We would seem to come within the published rubric. Perhaps, as Mr. Lord thinks, though we are "splendid," we are so insignificant as to not even be on FINA's radar screen unless WRs are involved. Hence, the complete lack of attention to how FINA's bumbling around may effect us.

Midas: Don't know about that. I'm sure there are masters that would want to opt for a durable speed suit rather than the easily ripped FINA approved speed suits.

If there were, as some have said, literally "a sea of B70s at Nationals," you'd think there'd be a market in masters.

aquageek
June 12th, 2009, 01:26 PM
I am curious about the relative sizes of the USAS and USMS markets. Everyone is assuming that the masters market is tiny in comparison...but I tell you, when I go to just run-of-the-mill meets, tech suits are MUCH more in evidence at masters meets than at age-group meets.


I had to think on this for a second because it is true, on face value. However, upon further reflection, a small kid's meet is 500 kids and a big USMS meet (east coast anyway) is 150. And, there are typically 2 or 3 large multi day USAS meets every weekend around here and packed to the gills. Toss in the Summer league meets during the week and I bet the balance is way towards the kids versus adults in terms of tech suits. HOWEVER, I will grant you that Masters probably buy tech suits in higher percentages than kiddies.

I tend to think that while the kids and NCAAs may be the sweet spot for the companies, Masters could represent a nice segment as well. After all, there are wetsuit companies out there that mostly only cater to adults. It does cost a lot to ship a $0.25 suit from Vietnam to the US and sell it for $50.

thewookiee
June 12th, 2009, 02:11 PM
In any event, I think this is a real boneheaded move. The rules regarding suits should be the same for everyone.

Why? Masters already has at least one rule different than age group/elite competiton in terms of swimming. Masters can do breastroke kick for fly while others can't. There are probably some others that I don't know about but why can't we have a separate ruling for suits? Who's it gonna hurt?

pwb
June 12th, 2009, 02:25 PM
I am curious about the relative sizes of the USAS and USMS markets. Everyone is assuming that the masters market is tiny in comparison...but I tell you, when I go to just run-of-the-mill meets, tech suits are MUCH more in evidence at masters meets than at age-group meets.

Obviously there are far more age-groupers than masters, but I wonder if the masters market is really as small as people are assuming. Old, fat people with disposable incomes, desperate to recapture glory days...sounds like a winner! :)

I've been trying to think of an entrepreneurial venture to start ... maybe there is a nice, niche market here. Now, if only I knew the first thing about suit design and production, I'd be set. I wonder if a "Bondage Speed Suit" would send the wrong message ...:)

I do think, though, like other posters have mentioned that the major suit makers will fall in line with FINA certainly by 2010 and phase out any tech suits that aren't FINA approved. I'm fine with that if that gives us all the rest of the year to wear out our current suits.

I still think B70's getting shafted and that this nonsense about "textile" only suits is a red herring to protect Speedo.

knelson
June 12th, 2009, 02:27 PM
Who's it gonna hurt?

I think it hurts masters swimming being seen as a serious competitive organization.

I don't really think the butterfrog rule is comparable. In that case the rule exists because of history: older folks learned the stroke that way. Besides, no one will argue that butterfrog is faster.

Rob Butcher
June 12th, 2009, 02:33 PM
All,

Kathy Kasey Chair of the Rules Committee is USMS spokesperson on this issue. Whatever statements Kathy issues is the position of USMS. The statement she issued on behalf of the Rules Committee on June 1 still stands (http://www.usms.org/rules/20090601swimsuits.pdf). The Rules Committee continues to monitor the situation and gather information on a daily basis. What is clear is the Recognition and Awards Committee is continuing to accept world records and Top 10 swims for Masters certification.

As more information is made available and the Rules Committee is able to analyze, they will issue statements.

Rob

thewookiee
June 12th, 2009, 02:39 PM
I think it hurts masters swimming being seen as a serious competitive organization.

I don't really think the butterfrog rule is comparable. In that case the rule exists because of history: older folks learned the stroke that way. Besides, no one will argue that butterfrog is faster.

Outside of masters swimmers who race frequently,do most people really consider this to be a serious competitive organization anyway?

And yes, I do believe it is comparable. I do believe there is a general agreement that based on body type and event(s), some suits help some people more than others. Butterfrog is the same way. There are individual swimmers out there that feel butterfrog is faster for them vs. using a dolphin kick.

I do think after jan. 1, 2010, usms will start falling in line with FINA on future suit approval for reasons stated in previous post. I think we should be allowed to use our current suits, that have been previously approved last year and before until they are worn out.

Most suit companies will probably offer masters swimming some discount to take the suits off their hands. Once they are out of the suits, they won't produce them. Individuals won't be able to buy hordes of them, esp. if sold around the world, so we are looking at maybe 1-2 years before they are used up. Not really that long in the grand scheme of things.

jim clemmons
June 12th, 2009, 02:46 PM
If the charter doesn't apply to masters, then maybe USMS will take the stance that all suits that were approved prior to Jan. 1, 2009 will be allowed in USMS events and any new suits that are developed must comply with FINA's new suit regulations.

But was the B70 ever actually "approved"?


This way, current suit will still be able to be used until they are worn out and any new suit developed will be in accordance with the new guidelines. This will take sometime, but eventually USMS would fall back inline with FINA.

Plus, it allows people the chance to use their current suits, and not have that much confusion on approved/not approved suits.

I hope so - in the meantime, I'd be glad I went for two of the suits that shall remain nameless :cool:. The second one after the April 1 date for "returns" as a "just in case".

jim clemmons
June 12th, 2009, 02:49 PM
And yes, I do believe it is comparable. I do believe there is a general agreement that based on body type and event(s), some suits help some people more than others. Butterfrog is the same way. There are individual swimmers out there that feel butterfrog is faster for them vs. using a dolphin kick.


I'm sure there may be some masters out there that couldn't complete a 200 fly without bf'ing some of it, if not all of it.

thewookiee
June 12th, 2009, 02:56 PM
But was the B70 ever actually "approved"?



I hope so - in the meantime, I'd be glad I went for two of the suits that shall remain nameless :cool:. The second one after the April 1 date for "returns" as a "just in case".

At somepoint in time, FINA "approved" the B70 for pool use. I do believe that blueseventy use to have a copy of the FINA approval letter on their website to show that it was ok for pool use.

To me, that letter would indicate "approved"

Midas
June 12th, 2009, 02:56 PM
Outside of masters swimmers who race frequently,do most people really consider this to be a serious competitive organization anyway?



I think anybody who owns a B70 or other tech suit certainly does consider masters swimming to be a serious competitive organization. So I think it's those people who would be most interested in maintaining that perception (even if it is solely in their own minds). In my mind, having a different rule on suits will absolutely hurt any possible perception that USMS is a serious competitive organization.

knelson
June 12th, 2009, 03:04 PM
You took the words right out of my mouth, Midas.

pwb
June 12th, 2009, 03:25 PM
I think anybody who owns a B70 or other tech suit certainly does consider masters swimming to be a serious competitive organization.

It is as serious (possibly more) than any other adult athletic venture. When you've got (admittedly a few) of the elite Masters competing at Trials, Grand Prix's, etc. and (more) with aspirations to do so, you're in the serious competitive zone. While many of us might not train as much as we'd like to or as we could when we're younger, those competitive fires are stoked pretty high when many (most?) of us are on the blocks at a meet.

thewookiee
June 12th, 2009, 03:27 PM
I think anybody who owns a B70 or other tech suit certainly does consider masters swimming to be a serious competitive organization. So I think it's those people who would be most interested in maintaining that perception (even if it is solely in their own minds). In my mind, having a different rule on suits will absolutely hurt any possible perception that USMS is a serious competitive organization.

The people that own the suits, aren't the ones I am talking about. Heck, people outside of swimming probably don't know there is much of a suit debate or what master swimming is to start with.

My point is this for masters. If the "tech suits" had been granted approval at somepoint over the last few years, they should be grandfathered into usms swimming. We all know the suits don't have that long of a life.

Once FINA has re-issued the list of approved suits and finalized their suit criteria of jan 1, 2010, the suit companies will focus their efforts on making the new suits under the new guidelines.

What USMS should consider doing is to allow the suits that have been used for the last year and before until they are no longer avaiable(which really won't be that long of time) for purchase

Once our suits are used up, we will be looking at suits that fall under the new guidelines. USMS will be adopting the new guidelines, even if by default.

knelson
June 12th, 2009, 03:48 PM
Once FINA has re-issued the list of approved suits and finalized their suit criteria of jan 1, 2010, the suit companies will focus their efforts on making the new suits under the new guidelines.

What USMS should consider doing is to allow the suits that have been used for the last year and before until they are no longer avaiable(which really won't be that long of time) for purchase

Your assumption is that the makers will stop making the suits that aren't approved by FINA, but I don't think that's absolutely guaranteed especially if those suits are still allowed for masters. Take a company like blueseventy that has been in the wetsuit business. Their bread and butter is making neoprene suits and that was their innovation in the pool suit realm. If FINA rules that suits cannot contain any impermeable material will they even choose to remain in the market? Maybe they'll see masters as a continued market for the Nero and will focus their efforts to that end.

thewookiee
June 12th, 2009, 04:23 PM
Your assumption is that the makers will stop making the suits that aren't approved by FINA, but I don't think that's absolutely guaranteed especially if those suits are still allowed for masters. Take a company like blueseventy that has been in the wetsuit business. Their bread and butter is making neoprene suits and that was their innovation in the pool suit realm. If FINA rules that suits cannot contain any impermeable material will they even choose to remain in the market? Maybe they'll see masters as a continued market for the Nero and will focus their efforts to that end.

Your right, it is an assumption. I am trying to put forth a possible suggestion/ compermise for masters swimming that may eventually get usms to come into agreement with FINA, will allowing suits to be used that were previously ok'd until they aren't fit to be used. This way, we don't have to go out to purchase new suits immediately and we can get our value out of the suits we have already purchased.

stillwater
June 12th, 2009, 05:58 PM
I have always had a beef about the high cost of the suit. I was told that this is America, we buy what we want. It was also bandied about how 500 smackaroos for a suit is chicken feed compared to other sports.

If the suit is legal I can sort-of understand the above arguments.

Now it appears that the suit is not legal, according to FINA.

Unlike your worthlesss suit, your argument about the cost holds no water. Or should I say air.

thewookiee
June 12th, 2009, 06:16 PM
IIf the suit is legal I can sort-of understand the above arguments.

Now it appears that the suit is not legal, according to FINA.

Unlike your worthlesss suit, your argument about the cost holds no water. Or should I say air.

For masters, it will appear the suit(s) are legal for the time being, from what is being reported from FINA

As for your second statement, that's your opinion about cost and worth.

jim clemmons
June 12th, 2009, 06:24 PM
I have always had a beef about the high cost of the suit. I was told that this is America, we buy what we want. It was also bandied about how 500 smackaroos for a suit is chicken feed compared to other sports.

If the suit is legal I can sort-of understand the above arguments.

Now it appears that the suit is not legal, according to FINA.

Unlike your worthlesss suit, your argument about the cost holds no water. Or should I say air.

I have my druthers, as well, especially when it comes to paying full retail for anything, suits included. Some of you just aren't very savvy (or seemingly so) when it comes to "buying".

I picked up my 2 (two) B70's for a grand total of $ 552.00 (US), one a full and the other a kneeskin (shortjohn). Both brand new, in the mesh bag, price includes tax. (Note: divide by 2 = 276.00 - this is less expensive than a new FSII, retail)

If you're talking about $500+ dollar suits, you must be referring to the Speedo LZR, 'cuz you're not anywhere near the realm of the price range for my suit(s).

rodent
June 12th, 2009, 06:50 PM
When an asterisk has its own asterisk, can anybody still see it?

--Zen Master Jim
Jim, I don't know, but if it can be done, it will take a Michigan man to do it.

I do think though, that in 2010 they should outlaw the Blue70, LZR and every other suit that provides an advantage because of flotation. The WR's which have been swum in these suits (128 in the LZR alone, I think) will be around for a long time. That's a problem!
What's wrong with delineating those WR's with an asterisk?

jim thornton
June 12th, 2009, 08:19 PM
Jack, how can you be a rodent when you are such an excellent grasshopper, grasshopper?

Zen Master Jim

Allen Stark
June 12th, 2009, 10:53 PM
This situation is worse than no rule.Right NOW it appears that FINA will accept USMS WRs but LCM season is just starting and then we have SCM before 1/1/10.There will be lots of WR times broken by USMS swimmers in that time but will they be WRs.Come on FINA rule committee,pull your head out and say something DEFINITIVE about Masters(and no I don't take comfort in the USMS position as FINA could rule in any arbitrary way their little peabrains tell them to.)

ViveBene
June 12th, 2009, 11:13 PM
This situation is worse than no rule.Right NOW it appears that FINA will accept USMS WRs but LCM season is just starting and then we have SCM before 1/1/10.There will be lots of WR times broken by USMS swimmers in that time but will they be WRs.Come on FINA rule committee,pull your head out and say something DEFINITIVE about Masters(and no I don't take comfort in the USMS position as FINA could rule in any arbitrary way their little peabrains tell them to.)
:)
Platform for nomination to FINA board.

I'm curious: is FINA one of those self-constituted entities without an actual mandate? (Like the Joint Commission, for those in hospitals or the medical field - two guys started giving out stars to hospitals back in the fifties, and the rest is history.)

rodent
June 12th, 2009, 11:53 PM
I don't see how they can not allow masters WR's, swum in the new tech suits. Since the suits are legal for competition, the WR's set in them should also be legal. The Canadians:canada: swam their SCM National Championship in them and they are legal in German Masters competition.
If USMS doesn't allow them we will actually be at a competitive disadvantage.
I think the problem with WR's will be that some WR's set in "flotation suits" for lack of better terminology, are artificially fast and might not be broken for a decade or more when we transition back to regular tech suits.
So it's possible that we won't see more than a few WR performances in swimming in the next decade.

rodent
June 12th, 2009, 11:58 PM
Jack, how can you be a rodent when you are such an excellent grasshopper, grasshopper?

Zen Master Jim
Jim, I am an excellent rodent!:bolt:

Crazyman
June 13th, 2009, 12:30 AM
Glad about this news at least. If anyone thinks he / she will set WR, they might want to be cautious with suits. So that simple as i see.
For me, i m not going to set any WR, therefore, i can swim in B70 or Jaked unless it will be banned by USMS president. Basta!

knelson
June 13th, 2009, 01:18 AM
What's wrong with delineating those WR's with an asterisk?

Because they are all perfectly valid records. They were sets under the rules for competition at that time. There are rules changes in swimming constantly and I don't think an 'asterisk' has ever been used before.

rodent
June 13th, 2009, 01:12 PM
Because they are all perfectly valid records. They were sets under the rules for competition at that time. There are rules changes in swimming constantly and I don't think an 'asterisk' has ever been used before.
The home run record set by Roger Maris was designated by an asterisk for many years. Maris hit 61* in a 162 game season, Ruth hit 60 in a 154 game season.
If the new flotation suits give swimmers such an advantage that FINA has to ban them in the middle of the season, then maybe FINA should think about designating the WR's swum in them (which I agree are valid) with an asterisk.
What's wrong with having two sets of WR's?
Some of the 160 plus WR's swum in flotation suits, will probably not be broken for decades, when we go back to regular tech suits.
That won't be good for the sport.
It does sound a bit drastic, but I think it is the only fair solution to a bad situation that was thrust upon us.

knelson
June 13th, 2009, 01:21 PM
The home run record set by Roger Maris was designated by an asterisk for many years. Maris hit 61* in a 162 game season, Ruth hit 60 in a 154 game season.

This is incorrect. There was never an asterisk applied to Maris' record. In fact MLB never even had an official record book until recently. Here's a link that explains it. (http://archive.salon.com/news/sports/col/barra/2001/10/03/asterisk/index.html)


What's wrong with having two sets of WR's?

I'd say because it goes against the very nature of what a record is supposed to mean--the fastest official time swum.


Some of the 160 plus WR's swum in flotation suits, will probably not be broken for decades, when we go back to regular tech suits.

In my opinion this won't be the case. Once that bar has been set swimmers will continue to swim close to that fast. There won't be the record assault we've had in the last year or two, but I doubt it will take "decades" for any of the current records to fall even if FINA decides to return to no tech suits whatsoever.

rodent
June 13th, 2009, 02:01 PM
Kirk, I don't know how accurate that article is, but it does say that for many years they kept both records as official.
I don't agree that the majority of the current WR's will be broken anytime soon. If the current Tech suits are in fact 1 second faster per 100 yards, that is a hugh advantage in elite competition.
In the next few years there will probably be swimmers who would be capable of breaking the existing WR's if they were able to use the current generation of tech suits. Some will fall short simply because they will not have that advantage.
I think that FINA made a mistake by allowing the LZR and other flotation suits.

jim thornton
June 13th, 2009, 04:47 PM
Let me propose a modest solution to this records business, at least as it applies to masters swimming.



Adopt the boxing model whereby different boxing commissions will allow all sorts of different people to simultaneously claim to be the current champion of the world
Throw away medals as a token of victory and adopt instead ludicrously oversized belts with what appear to be turkey platter sized belt buckles made out of heavy metals
Require all claimants to "fastest masters swimmer" in the different male and female age groups, swim distances, strokes, and masters swimming sanctioning commissions to wear, in addition to whatever speed suits their respective officiating bodies allow, their championship belts whenever they race
It's a win-win. The more a person wins, the more ludicrous the assortment of heavy metal championship belts they must wear, in addition to whatever cheating suit is permitted. This will gradually segue our sport from the boxing model into the horse racing model, where certain jockeys and horses must carry additional weight during sweepstakes.
Granted, we may lose a few of our best swimmers to freak drowning accidents. This is probably inevitable in masters water polo especially, where the tangling up of heavy belts is practically inevitable, and rat's nests of entangled players will sink to the bottom of the pool, beyond timely salvation. However, it is a small price to pay to allow more than just the "good" swimmers to hog all the records for themselves?
On this note, having come up with the definitive solution to the problem--not unlike the senate's use of agricultural co-ops to solve, once and for all, the US healthcare monstrosity--I am confident we can at last all agree: THIS is the perfect answer. Not a word more need be added. Perfect!

geochuck
June 13th, 2009, 05:33 PM
A world record is a world record, why do we have to have world records recorded by the old age groupies. No 60 year old sets a true world's record. Old timers would never be able to compete with the likes of Phelps. You oldsters are trying to prove something you are not.

There should only be one set of worlds records.

There is a true set of world records everything else is a fantasy.

jim thornton
June 13th, 2009, 06:08 PM
A world record is a world record, why do we have to have world records recorded by the old age groupies. No 60 year old sets a true world's record. Old timers would never be able to compete with the likes of Phelps. You oldsters are trying to prove something you are not.

There should only be one set of worlds records.

There is a true set of world records everything else is a fantasy.


Well, since most world records are set by men, are you saying that there shouldn't be "world records" for women?

geochuck
June 13th, 2009, 06:23 PM
Jim you are taking my words out of context, men are men a should be able to set world records for males. One set of records for males.

Women are women and should also be able to set female world records.

And yes she/men should also be able to set world records within their group.

meldyck
June 13th, 2009, 06:49 PM
A world record is a world record, why do we have to have world records recorded by the old age groupies. No 60 year old sets a true world's record. Old timers would never be able to compete with the likes of Phelps. You oldsters are trying to prove something you are not.

There should only be one set of worlds records.

There is a true set of world records everything else is a fantasy.

If we are going to follow this plan, then there should be NO age group records for younger athletes either. Wonder how that would play with the 8 and under set and their coaches? But, as George points out, they cannot keep up with Michael and should not be trying to prove something...

stillwater
June 13th, 2009, 06:55 PM
I (surprise) am against letting anyone wear banned suits in competition till they wear out.

Shall I shelve my suit for a decade, pull it out when I feel the urge to swim an artifically fast time?

Shall I be a good capitalist and purchase nine suits now, saving them for my moment of glory years from now?

I think all of the banned suits are worn out now.

An asterisk should be placed on the forehead of the dummies that allowed them in the pool in the first place.

jim thornton
June 13th, 2009, 07:03 PM
Until the adoption goes through, I am not going to rock the boat in any way regarding my wise Canadian father.

Just accept that George knows more than you do.

The idea of 8 and unders competing against Michael Phelps actually appeals to me. It will wipe the smug little smiles off their faces pretty quick, and prepare them for future life with the American Healthcare system the moment they are no longer eligible for that subsidized Chip program, whatever it's called.

I think that we should find the best person in every single field of human endeavor--Tiger Woods for golf, Harry Reems for male sexuality, George Park for standards, and so forth--then actively discourage anyone else from wasting their time in that particular endeavor.

That's the last thing we need is a bunch of wannabee Michael Phelps's, clogging up pool time!

To be honest, I no longer have the faintest idea where I am going with this reply. It makes very little, if any, sense. I think we need to find the absolute best poster and let him or her write all the posts in the future, and actively discourage anyone else from wasting their time in this particular endeavor.

That's the last thing we need is a bunch of Optimum Poster wannabes clogging up the Internet with nonsense.

What day is this?

Who am I?

Huh?

stillwater
June 13th, 2009, 07:19 PM
Who is Harry Reems and how do you know about him?

jim thornton
June 13th, 2009, 07:22 PM
Who is Harry Reems and how do you know about him?


Wasn't he a pioneering sexologist at Johns Hopkins here in the enlightened if prim East? Or was he a Southern California porn star who died of AIDS? One or the other, I think.

George, do you think Harry's records should stand?

Gail Roper
June 13th, 2009, 08:38 PM
I swam in the SCM Nationals in Toronto and I don't rememeber many swimmers in high tech suits, but there were a few.......I didn't wear one for my swims this year, some would call me foolish. My consience is clear.

geochuck
June 13th, 2009, 09:27 PM
Harry set a record of over 600 million dollars for one of his films but he died before he received the credits.

The Fortress
June 13th, 2009, 09:39 PM
My consience is clear.

Mine is too.

therads
June 13th, 2009, 10:48 PM
Any word on the NIKE tech suits. NIKE is not on the FINA list. Is this because NIKE is not making tech suits or are there problems with the NIKE Hydra? One of my former high school swimmers is wearing one for a Fireman's Game Meet. I told him I thought NIKE suits came early and were not part of the discussion.
What's the word out there?
Thanks,
Dave

thewookiee
June 14th, 2009, 09:53 AM
Mine is too.

And mine

Allen Stark
June 14th, 2009, 10:39 AM
A world record is a world record, why do we have to have world records recorded by the old age groupies. No 60 year old sets a true world's record. Old timers would never be able to compete with the likes of Phelps. You oldsters are trying to prove something you are not.

There should only be one set of worlds records.

There is a true set of world records everything else is a fantasy.

I TOTALLY disagree.If a 60 year old sets a WR it means there is no one in the world that age who has swum faster.That is impressive to me.George,to take your idea to it's logical conclusion why keep WRs for any distance over 50 as the swimmers in longer distances are fooling themselves to think they are really the fastest.

stillwater
June 14th, 2009, 10:49 AM
Mr. Stark,

Seems like you agree with Ion. World records for many categories.

Allen Stark
June 14th, 2009, 11:02 AM
Mr. Stark,

Seems like you agree with Ion. World records for many categories.

I'm fine with 5 year age groups,4 strokes plus IM,2 genders(the current system).I just wish FINA would make a final decision that makes sense.

geochuck
June 14th, 2009, 11:03 AM
Allen I have a big nose. Should I be able to set a world swimming record for people with a big nose aged 76. Should people with a small nose aged 76 also be able to set a world record for people with small noses 76 years old.

Glenn
June 14th, 2009, 12:26 PM
Why don't we call the records by Phelps et. al.,World Records and all the other ones, Age Group World Records.

jim thornton
June 14th, 2009, 01:40 PM
My consience is clear.

My conscience is not now, nor has it ever been, nor is it likely to ever be, clear. Translucent, perhaps. But clear? I just don't think that is in the cards for me.

rodent
June 14th, 2009, 04:52 PM
I swam in the SCM Nationals in Toronto:canada: and I don't remember many swimmers in high tech suits, but there were a few.......I didn't wear one for my swims this year, some would call me foolish. My consience is clear.

Assumming it remains legal, I intend to compete in USMS competition, in the FINA banned, Blue70. My conscience will be clear (a fiqure of speech Jim) and my checking account balance will be $500 fatter, than if I had purchased the FINA legal, LZR.

orca1946
June 14th, 2009, 07:02 PM
I can't wait for more info??!!

jim clemmons
June 14th, 2009, 07:42 PM
My conscience is not now, nor has it ever been, nor is it likely to ever be, clear. Translucent, perhaps. But clear? I just don't think that is in the cards for me.

How's "muddled" work?

Just trying to be helpful...:bighug:

jim clemmons
June 14th, 2009, 07:48 PM
Assumming it remains legal, I intend to compete in USMS competition, in the FINA banned, Blue70. My conscience will be clear (a fiqure of speech Jim) and my checking account balance will be $500 fatter, than if I had purchased the FINA legal, LZR.

Absolutely, although, technically speaking, our account balance will be equal to the difference of the two items since we have to fork out the dough for the suit du jour, B70 or otherwise. I'll stick with the B70 as well, regardless of my conscious - clear, muddled or opaque - whatever.

:chug:

rodent
June 14th, 2009, 08:10 PM
Absolutely, although, technically speaking, our account balance will be equal to the difference of the two items since we have to fork out the dough for the suit du jour, B70 or otherwise. I'll stick with the B70 as well, regardless of my conscious - clear, muddled or opaque - whatever.

:chug:
Jim, Your math is right, but if you participate in the "buy-back", that Blue70 will have in January, 2010, you will get $200 credit on a new 70. You can turn in your 70 in January (after maybe 25 races) and buy a new 2010 FINA approved 70, for $200 off retail.
I added the $200 buy-back into my calculations. Blue70 is a much better deal.
I love swimming, but the cost of the LZR and the way Speedo does business don't appeal to me. See you in INDY!:chug:

Peter Cruise
June 14th, 2009, 08:17 PM
Thornton has a conscience, albeit it is Smeagol-like in a devotion to dark, slimy places where the sun does not shine.

jim thornton
June 14th, 2009, 10:27 PM
Thornton has a conscience, albeit it is Smeagol-like in a devotion to dark, slimy places where the sun does not shine.

http://www.google.com/images?q=tbn:7IgslZtXmn7ANM::imagecache.allposters .com/images/pic/ADVG/440~Personaggio-voce-desktop-Smeagol-Il-Signore-degli-anelli-Posters.jpg (http://www.google.com/images?q=tbn:7IgslZtXmn7ANM::imagecache.allposters .com/images/pic/ADVG/440%7EPersonaggio-voce-desktop-Smeagol-Il-Signore-degli-anelli-Posters.jpg)

I am pretty sure that Mr. Cruise is calling me Precious.

Thanks, Mr. C. But I am really not nearly as precious as you might think from just, well, knowing me.

meldyck
June 14th, 2009, 10:33 PM
I'm wondering if FINA really requires that we swim with a conscience. I didn't see anything about it in the suit list or any other press releases. Does it constitute a tight-fitting extra suit? Since I don't have one, it isn't important to me whether anyone can see through it or not...

michaelmoore
June 14th, 2009, 11:52 PM
Well, he's a "Press Commission" guy, who may or may not also be a rule-making guy. Certainly I have observed other types of "press secretaries" getting it wrong, or maybe getting it right at the time but then their decision-making bosses go and change the decision on them.


Pedro Adrega is the Honorary Secretary of the FINA Press Commission. He is also the Editor in Chief of FINA Aquatics, the official monthly magazine of FINA. The last time I spoke with him (and it was over a year ago), he works directly for Cornel. Knowing the FINA office, nothing is going out without Cornel's approval.

As there is an Extraordinary FINA Masters Congress in Rome next month, I would not expect any change in any decision until then. I would imagine that the FINA Masters Commission would be looking for direction from the FINA Bureau.

just my $0.02.

-michael

Gail Roper
June 15th, 2009, 12:28 AM
Nancy R said that the Masters Committee is not going to Rome

Peter Cruise
June 15th, 2009, 01:59 AM
Mr. Thornton- well it is true that I only know of your conscience through rumour and innuendo spread through the internet- that stands as a solid link to this discussion thread (huzzah!) by which the official FINA relationship to Masters resembles nothing so much as our masquerade thread with sheep and pole themata relates to the Congressional Record.

rodent
June 15th, 2009, 10:17 AM
Pedro Adrega is the Honorary Secretary of the FINA Press Commission. He is also the Editor in Chief of FINA Aquatics, the official monthly magazine of FINA. The last time I spoke with him (and it was over a year ago), he works directly for Cornel. Knowing the FINA office, nothing is going out without Cornel's approval.

As there is an Extraordinary FINA Masters Congress in Rome next month, I would not expect any change in any decision until then. I would imagine that the FINA Masters Commission would be looking for direction from the FINA Bureau.

just my $0.02.

-michael
Is that because the FINA Bureau has done such a good job of clarifying the situation so far?:confused:

Leonard Jansen
June 15th, 2009, 12:27 PM
Mr. Stark,

Seems like you agree with Ion. World records for many categories.

This is a violation of the "He That May Not Be Named" Rule. This is a far more grave offense than an tech suit violation.

-LBJ

That Guy
June 15th, 2009, 03:38 PM
This is a violation of the "He That May Not Be Named" Rule. This is a far more grave offense than an tech suit violation.

-LBJ

So... if I were to enter a 200 fly with NT, walk up behind the blocks wearing three B70's, each of which had a large hole in the posterior, and I had a certain three letter name tattooed on my rear end, and I butterfrogged the first 100 for a split request and then loafed the rest... the question remains, what song would floswimming.org use for the video of my performance?????

MegSmath
June 15th, 2009, 04:28 PM
Why? Masters already has at least one rule different than age group/elite competiton in terms of swimming. Masters can do breastroke kick for fly while others can't. There are probably some others that I don't know about but why can't we have a separate ruling for suits? Who's it gonna hurt?

The better comparison is that FINA doesn't do drug testing of Masters swimmers. So apparently we can wear whatever we want and take whatever we want, whereas Olympic-caliber swimmers can do neither.

CreamPuff
June 15th, 2009, 04:52 PM
My conscience is not now, nor has it ever been, nor is it likely to ever be, clear. Translucent, perhaps. But clear? I just don't think that is in the cards for me.

:lolup:

I'm with Jim. His conscience is translucent (I was thinking more opaque - hope you don't take offense to that Jim as you know I love you) and mine is sleepy with masters. However, it's at full attention with USA-S - all those darn rules and such.

jim thornton
June 15th, 2009, 05:33 PM
:lolup:

I'm with Jim. His conscience is translucent (I was thinking more opaque - hope you don't take offense to that Jim as you know I love you) and mine is sleepy with masters. However, it's at full attention with USA-S - all those darn rules and such.

One of these days, I hope that my translucent conscience and your sleepy one can wrestle each other in the arena of moral ambiguity. It would be nice to pin you to the matt; on the other hand, I could live with being pinned, too.

michaelmoore
June 15th, 2009, 05:42 PM
Nancy R said that the Masters Committee is not going to Rome

I said the Commission, which is the Chairman, Vice Chair and Honorary Secretary. In many cases the Commission makes the decisions for the Committee, when the Committee is not meeting.

Hope you are doing well, Gail. I see you continue to break records.

-michael

orca1946
June 15th, 2009, 08:01 PM
Can I wear a plain old speedo?:bolt:

Allen Stark
June 15th, 2009, 08:49 PM
The better comparison is that FINA doesn't do drug testing of Masters swimmers. So apparently we can wear whatever we want and take whatever we want, whereas Olympic-caliber swimmers can do neither.

Using PEDs is against Masters rules.We don't test and many things the IOC considers PEDs are legitimate health treatments for us,but that doesn't mean we approve of doping.

geochuck
June 15th, 2009, 09:46 PM
Allen you scared me I thought you wrote that pez was not allowed http://www.pez.com/v/default1.htm

stillwater
June 16th, 2009, 01:36 AM
This is a violation of the "He That May Not Be Named" Rule. This is a far more grave offense than an tech suit violation.

-LBJ

I can't break records, I can't break dance, if I break wind I'm worried about the bonus.

I can break the "HMNBM" rule.

I miss Ion. He broke down the boundries of decorum and flustered so many. Me included.

geochuck
June 16th, 2009, 01:42 AM
The dreaded name appears again-------

MegSmath
June 16th, 2009, 07:34 AM
Using PEDs is against Masters rules.We don't test and many things the IOC considers PEDs are legitimate health treatments for us,but that doesn't mean we approve of doping.

:rolleyes: I didn't say we approve of performance enhancing drugs. I said FINA doesn't require drug testing for Masters. BIG difference.

preeder61
June 16th, 2009, 04:26 PM
I am curious about the relative sizes of the USAS and USMS markets. Everyone is assuming that the masters market is tiny in comparison...but I tell you, when I go to just run-of-the-mill meets, tech suits are MUCH more in evidence at masters meets than at age-group meets.

You can look at this as a basic business model. 30,000 USMS active members, generously 50% compete (15,000), 20% own a tech suit (3,000) you buy a tech suit every 18 months (1,200 annually) a suit costs $400 retail ($200 whsl) that's $240k revenue. Split that between Speedo, B70 and TYR (not to mention Jaked, Finis et.) Each player gets about $800k annually. Pays reps, sponsored athletes, promotions and advertising to the USMS audience.

There is no cash to be made here. Between USA, High School and College, not to include summer league (a debate on another thread) There your tech suit potential is about 15X the USMS number.

The manufacturer's will stick to the legal suits and keep all the markets supplied.

orca1946
June 16th, 2009, 05:14 PM
This is getting WORSE rather than better!

knelson
June 16th, 2009, 06:03 PM
You can look at this as a basic business model. 30,000 USMS active members, generously 50% compete (15,000), 20% own a tech suit (3,000)

Not that this is going to change the business case much, but I think much more than 20% of those who compete in masters own tech suits. My experience is that traditional suits are in the minority at the events I attend.

Chris Stevenson
June 16th, 2009, 06:30 PM
Not that this is going to change the business case much, but I think much more than 20% of those who compete in masters own tech suits. My experience is that traditional suits are in the minority at the events I attend.

Yes, you can quibble with the numbers quite a bit -- getting close to 50,000 members at this point, I believe; a much higher percentage who compete wear tech suits; and most of those favor B70, some even have multiple suits, replacement time is generally shorter than 18 months -- but I think the net result of this optimistically only increases the net by approximately an order of magnitude and that still may not be a very significant market.

I don't think the age-group market is really significantly bigger though. Just guessing but I would think colleges would be more lucrative, since almost everyone I have seen wears one, at least at the D1 level. I'm not sure at the other levels.

rodent
June 17th, 2009, 12:04 AM
You can look at this as a basic business model. 30,000 USMS active members, generously 50% compete (15,000), 20% own a tech suit (3,000) you buy a tech suit every 18 months (1,200 annually) a suit costs $400 retail ($200 whsl) that's $240k revenue. Split that between Speedo, B70 and TYR (not to mention Jaked, Finis et.) Each player gets about $800k annually. Pays reps, sponsored athletes, promotions and advertising to the USMS audience.

There is no cash to be made here. Between USA, High School and College, not to include summer league (a debate on another thread) There your tech suit potential is about 15X the USMS number.

The manufacturer's will stick to the legal suits and keep all the markets supplied.
I would guess that if you included the world Masters market, it might be 10 times the US market. If it is even 50,000 and 25,000 bought $400 tech suits, that would be 10 million retail. Someone will make tech suits for our specific requirements, if things go that way.
It is really to early for me to worry about that. I want to know what tech suit I can wear NEXT WEEK!

knelson
June 17th, 2009, 11:10 AM
I think there could be a difference in investing in the R&D for new suits specifically geared toward masters, but continuing to produce the currently in production "banned" suits might be a different story. I don't see why B70 would stop producing the Nero if there's still a market for it.

jroddin
June 17th, 2009, 11:20 AM
I think there could be a difference in investing in the R&D for new suits specifically geared toward masters, but continuing to produce the currently in production "banned" suits might be a different story. I don't see why B70 would stop producing the Nero if there's still a market for it.

Unless they can see the writing on the wall?

And if anybody out there can make out the writing, please let us know!

rodent
June 17th, 2009, 12:40 PM
QUOTE=jroddin;183721]Unless they can see the writing on the wall?

And if anybody out there can make out the writing, please let us know![/QUOTE]
FINA has been very quiet lately. Too quiet!

thewookiee
June 17th, 2009, 12:46 PM
QUOTE=jroddin;183721]Unless they can see the writing on the wall?

And if anybody out there can make out the writing, please let us know!
FINA has been very quiet lately. Too quiet![/QUOTE]

Actually, the spoke yesterday. They announced they would release the retest list on June 22, after the paris open. They were going to do it the day before the meet but were asked by the french federation to wait until after the meet.

jim thornton
June 17th, 2009, 12:55 PM
Unless they can see the writing on the wall?

And if anybody out there can make out the writing, please let us know!


I can just barely glimpse it in the mirror.

They appear to have used some kind of red ink to write the message on the wall, and frankly, it doesn't make any sense to me.

It says:



REDRUM

jroddin
June 17th, 2009, 01:06 PM
Jim Thornton writes:
I can just barely glimpse it in the mirror.

Is that because there are so many cracks in your mirror?:bolt:

pwolf66
June 17th, 2009, 01:17 PM
Jim Thornton writes:

Is that because there are so many cracks in your mirror?:bolt:

Those cracks aren't in the mirror :eek:

jim thornton
June 17th, 2009, 01:32 PM
Why you little devil!

And you big one!

Chris Stevenson
June 17th, 2009, 01:35 PM
Unless they can see the writing on the wall?

And if anybody out there can make out the writing, please let us know!

I guess the writing must have said, "Sue FINA!"

Chris Stevenson
June 17th, 2009, 02:17 PM
Just found this blog entry by David Guthrie, which captures well how I feel about blurring the line between USS and USMS:

http://www.floswimming.org/blogs/blogger/fluidG/5124-emerge

This is why I think the rules should be the same, as much as possible. I'm willing to accept, grudgingly, the existence of "butterfrog" as an isolated historic anamoly -- my aching knees would accept it better if they reciprocated and allowed dolphin kick during breatstroke ("breastdolphin?") :) -- but I think allowing "fast suits" at masters and not USS sends the wrong message that masters is not for serious swimming. Even Creampuff echoed such sentiments, unless I'm misreading her statements.

I swim in both types of meets, strictly as a matter of venue and scheduling. Sometimes I swim better in the USS meets and sometimes the USMS, but it isn't because one is inherently more conducive to fast swimming than the other. I should point out that at every single USS meet I have ever been to, at least one swimmer and one parent has approached me and told me how "inspired" they are to see fast swimming by someone who is middle-aged (I detest that phrase but have to face facts).

Don't we want to be getting this message out to our young swimmers? And their parents? Blurring the boundaries between the two worlds is a good way to do that.

FINA's analogy to drug testing is incorrect. Drug testing is expensive, would result in a lot of positives in the masters world due to legitimate medical treatments, and would be a logistical nightmare at big masters meets. But I think cheating by wearing an illegal suit would be more obvious. (We already forbid multiple suits, which isn't always so easy to determine.)

I am not faulting USMS for their current stance. This is a difficult transition period and FINA has not provided a lot of leadership. But I really hope that eventually (say, within a year), USS and USMS will have united suit rules.

pwb
June 17th, 2009, 02:22 PM
Just found this blog entry by David Guthrie, which captures well how I feel about blurring the line between USS and USMS:

http://www.floswimming.org/blogs/blogger/fluidG/5124-emerge

... I really hope that eventually (say, within a year), USS and USMS will have united suit rules.

Good post by Mr. Guthrie.

I second your hope for a unified suit policy, provided it is clearly articulated and objectively measurable.

The Fortress
June 17th, 2009, 05:49 PM
Actually, the spoke yesterday. They announced they would release the retest list on June 22, after the paris open. They were going to do it the day before the meet but were asked by the french federation to wait until after the meet.

Excellent! I can definitely swim with a B70 and a clear conscience on the 21st then. I did swam sans B70 last weekend and did not even drown.

Will FINA officially address masters then I wonder?

gull
June 17th, 2009, 06:16 PM
I did swam sans B70 last weekend...

When I first read this post...well, never mind.

The Fortress
June 17th, 2009, 06:28 PM
When I first read this post...well, never mind.

Haha. I still engaged in the covering up of the body.

pwb
June 17th, 2009, 06:29 PM
Actually, the spoke yesterday. They announced they would release the retest list on June 22, after the paris open. They were going to do it the day before the meet but were asked by the french federation to wait until after the meet.

is there a link to this?

meldyck
June 17th, 2009, 09:31 PM
Will FINA officially address masters then I wonder?

It should be any day now. My sources tell me that someone has pointed out to them recently that master's exist.

geochuck
June 18th, 2009, 01:14 AM
What a waste of time spent on anticipation of what FINA is going to say or do. I think there still will be no concrete decision. They will be testing for a very long time. The real culprit here is they are allowing neoprene suits. Neoprene floats even if it only 30% neoprene.

jroddin
June 18th, 2009, 08:17 AM
You can look at this as a basic business model. 30,000 USMS active members, generously 50% compete (15,000), 20% own a tech suit (3,000) you buy a tech suit every 18 months (1,200 annually) a suit costs $400 retail ($200 whsl) that's $240k revenue...

As Chris pointed out, we are approx 50k strong now.

Generously 50% compete?? Fifty percent don't even make it to practice let alone compete! :D I only have figures for Potomac Valley but for the SCY season that just ended, only 13.2% competed. And a large zone meet was even hosted within our LMSC. If the zone meet was not in PV, I would hazzard a guess of no more than 10% of the swimmers participating in meets.

Ripple
June 18th, 2009, 09:53 AM
...Neoprene floats even if it only 30% neoprene.
I thought it only floated if they inject bubbles and make a foam of it. :confused:
Otherwise it's a solid block of synthetic rubber. Like my Zoomers, which sink straight to the bottom of the deep end when I'm trying to take them off in a hurry.

jim clemmons
June 18th, 2009, 11:29 AM
As Chris pointed out, we are approx 50k strong now.

Generously 50% compete?? Fifty percent don't even make it to practice let alone compete! :D I only have figures for Potomac Valley but for the SCY season that just ended, only 13.2% competed. And a large zone meet was even hosted within our LMSC. If the zone meet was not in PV, I would hazzard a guess of no more than 10% of the swimmers participating in meets.

I think I've seen previous numbers that indicated 15-20% of registered members actually compete.

geochuck
June 18th, 2009, 11:41 AM
I met the local masters swim coach last night at a childrens development meet. She asked how I was doing and said that in four years. She said you have only been to 2 practicesin the 4 years, how come? I told her I hate doing the workouts they want me to do. She replied that everyone would like me to comeany way. I told her the workouts interfear with my schedule of vacations to Mexico. Oct 15 to March 15.

How can I compete with my vacation cycle.


I think I've seen previous numbers that indicated 15-20% of registered members actually compete.

geochuck
June 18th, 2009, 11:52 AM
My swim fins made of rubber float to the top, I guess it depends on who makes the rubber. I have several swim suits that were made for me and they have vulcanized rubber seams and they float like a cork. They were made for the bicycle guys to ride races in. We removed the padding and changed the fabric to the New Lycra which is teflon coated. The bike guys now wear them in bike races.


I thought it only floated if they inject bubbles and make a foam of it. :confused:
Otherwise it's a solid block of synthetic rubber. Like my Zoomers, which sink straight to the bottom of the deep end when I'm trying to take them off in a hurry.

Ripple
June 18th, 2009, 03:24 PM
...They were made for the bicycle guys to ride races in we removed the padding and changed the fabric of the New Lycra which is teflon coated. The bike guys now wear them in races.
Teflon film coated lycra? That sounds like Darlex. That's definitely not permeable. I made a knee-length suit from it last year, thinking it would be warm for early season open water swims. When I got out from the first swim, I had two big cantelope-size blobs of water sloshing around the outside of my legs from where the water in the suit ran down and met the elastic hem on the legs. Quite funny, actually.

geochuck
June 18th, 2009, 04:45 PM
Ripple not Darlex they are 82% Polyester / 18% Lycra

Darlexx http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Spandex

This site also talks about swim wear http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Swimsuit


:whiteflag::whiteflag: Did you sew them in Calgary in the winter with frozen fingers???
I am afraid your sewing skills must not have been too good. If constructed right they should have been waterproof but not hold water.

Ripple
June 18th, 2009, 10:32 PM
Ripple not Darlex they are 82% Polyester / 18% Lycra

Darlexx http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Spandex

This site also talks about swim wear http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Swimsuit


:whiteflag::whiteflag: Did you sew them in Calgary in the winter with frozen fingers???
I am afraid your sewing skills must not have been too good. If constructed right they should have been waterproof but not hold water.
You might not have insulated, centrally heated houses where you live, but we've had them since at least 1912 here. And thanks for posting the definition of lycra! Gosh, I've only made about 23 suits out of it, so I would never have known what it was if you hadn't posted that link! :rolleyes:
(I prefer Chloroban. Less squirmy under the presser foot.)
The Darlex stuff held water because it had a teflon film bonded to one side. Like Goretex. It was intended to be a waterproof stretch fabric, but was just a little too stretchy when completely wet.

orca1946
June 19th, 2009, 01:46 PM
I used Ripple in the 70's :D Not to wear unless you spilled it !:bolt:

geochuck
June 19th, 2009, 02:44 PM
Difference is each thread fibre is coated, teflon was not bonded to one side.

You might not have insulated, centrally heated houses where you live, but we've had them since at least 1912 here. And thanks for posting the definition of lycra! Gosh, I've only made about 23 suits out of it, so I would never have known what it was if you hadn't posted that link! :rolleyes:
(I prefer Chloroban. Less squirmy under the presser foot.)
The Darlex stuff held water because it had a teflon film bonded to one side. Like Goretex. It was intended to be a waterproof stretch fabric, but was just a little too stretchy when completely wet.

geochuck
June 22nd, 2009, 11:40 AM
How true is this statement now.

What a waste of time spent on anticipation of what FINA is going to say or do. I think there still will be no concrete decision. They will be testing for a very long time.

geochuck
June 24th, 2009, 10:07 AM
There are 2 pictures a Jonny Weismueller' swim suits here. Will they take his goldmedal back becuse his Olympic suit does not Qualify???
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic-art/639166/15177/American-swimmer-Johnny-Weissmuller-who-won-three-gold-medals-at